Sunday, January 24, 2016

A Miami woman who was filmed attacking an Uber driver and throwing the man's belongings into the street before walking away has been identified as a local doctor.

Anjali Ramkissoon, who is a fourth-year neurology resident with Jackson Health System, reportedly got into an Uber without a reservation on Sunday night. When the driver asked her to leave, she became angry and belligerent.

The video shows her punching and kicking the man, who eventually walks away, and then getting into the passenger seat of the vehicle and throwing his mail, cell phone, electronics and other devices and possessions out into the street.

At one point she also yells at him; 'Get the f*** in the car, you piece of f***ing disgusting s***.'

Repercussions: Jackson Health System said in statement that the fourth-year neurology resident has been placed on leave and that it has launched an investigation into the incident

The Miami Herald reports that Ramkissoon has now been 'removed from all clinical duties'.

Her employer said in a statement; 'Jackson has launched an internal investigation.

'The outcome of the investigation will determine whether any disciplinary action will be taken, up to and including termination.'

The video footage was taken by Juan Cinco, who had ordered the car to take him home from the Mary Brickell Village in Miami, Florida, on Sunday night. He later uploaded the clip to YouTube.

Information posted with the clip explains Ramkissoon, who was dressed in tight white shorts and a red top, came 'out of nowhere' and climbed into the backseat of the Uber.

When she refused to get out, Mr Cinco and his friend told the driver to cancel their ride and offered to book another ride home.

He said the driver pretended to phone the police, asking them to remove the woman from his car, which prompted Ramkissoon to reach into the front seat, grab his keys and start to walk away.

This was the point at which Cinco started filming, he said.

Then, Ramkissoon climbs into the front passenger seat and starts to throw items off the dashboard on to the street while ordering the driver to 'get in the f***ing car'.

He refuses and Ramkissoon shouts: 'Get the f*** in the car you piece of f***ing disgusting s***'.

Ramkissoon continues to throw items on to the ground, including the driver's iPhone, cash and dozens of pieces of paper and receipts.

At one point she hurls a pair of scissors that lands just inches away from Mr Cinco.

The driver phones the police and tells them he has 'bruises' from the Ramkissoon's attack as she mocks his pleas, saying 'I'm a 5ft tall girl who weighs 100lbs and I am getting really belligerent right now'.

She then throws even more paperwork out the window and Mr Cinco tells her she has 'lost her mind'. One of the items strikes the wing mirror of a car parked nearby.

In his YouTube post, Mr Cinco writes that the police arrived and had to remove Ramkissoon from a taxi she had hailed in an attempt to leave.

He continued: 'Once in handcuffs, she then tried kicking some of the police officers on the scene. 'It was only when they put her in the police car that she started crying, apologizing, and claiming that she would lose her medical license (she claimed to be a neurologist) if she got arrested.'

Mr Cinco said the Uber driver was 'too good of a person' and decided to take a cash settlement - 'only enough to pay his cellphone bill and maybe his cable bill' - rather than take legal action.

Miami police spokeswoman Frederica Burden confirmed officers had responded to the scene but said there was no report and there would be no investigation.

To fully understand the significance of the horrific violence in the square outside Cologne’s ­cathedral on New Year’s Eve, you need to go back to that same place almost exactly one year earlier. In the first week of January 2015, ­Cologne’s church leaders decided to turn off the lights of the city’s grand cathedral. They refused to allow the cathedral to be used as a backdrop for Germans protesting against rising immigration and concerned about the threat of Islam­ification. Cologne Cathedral provost Norbert Feldhoff said: “The Cologne Cathedral will be shrouded in darkness.” Fittingly, Germans have the perfect word for this: totschweigtaktik. It means death by silence. Or in this case, death by darkness. Books, ideas, people that challenge the status quo are simply ignored.

Almost a year later, in the same place, darkness of a different kind enveloped Cologne’s cathedral. On New Year’s Eve, marauding groups of migrant men, well over a thousand in total, broke into groups to surround women, stealing from them, groping their bodies and their breasts, reaching into their underwear to digitally ­assault them and even raping a few of the unfortunate victims. That dark night, Europe was violently put on notice about the predictable consequences of the ill-conceived migration policy that has, in the past 12 months alone, seen the arrival of more than a million registered asylum-seekers in Germany alone. Most are from the Middle East and Africa.

Another form of darkness ­engulfed the square around ­Cologne’s cathedral in the days that followed those attacks. The first reaction from Cologne’s police was, like the city’s church leaders last year, to shroud the public in darkness. Initial reports by police said “all was peaceful” that night outside the cathedral. More totschweigtaktik. Private notes taken by police that night detailed anything but peace. Police received numerous complaints from women of frightening intimidation and assaults by ­migrant men. One set of notes read: “Several injured women. All suffered attempts to introduce fingers in vaginas … All were touched on the chest and buttocks. Finger was introduced inside a victim.”

One of the victims, Katja L, ­described being surrounded by foreign men and how she “felt a hand on my buttocks, then on my breasts, in the end I was groped everywhere. It was a nightmare. Although we shouted and beat them, the guys did not stop. I was desperate and think I was touched around 100 times in the 200 ­metres.” Another police note ­refuted the initial report that ­migrants were not to blame for the assaults. The note ­described men as “North African looking” and Arabic speaking. ­Another nota­tion recorded a perpetrator saying: “I am Syrian. You have to treat me kindly. Mrs Merkel invited me.” Police officers found a note on one of the men with an Arabic to German translation of “nice breasts”, “I’ll kill you” and “I want to have sex with you”. Similar ­attacks took place in Stuttgart, Hamburg, Munich, Dusseldorf and Berlin. A week later, Sweden woke to learn of similarly censored police reports of sexual ­assaults during a 2014 music festival. How do you say ­totsch­weig­taktik in Swedish?

By last week, Cologne police had received more than 600 complaints of robbery and sexual ­assault. A private police report, leaked to a newspaper a few days after the attacks, ­revealed how police censored the backgrounds of the men because it was “politically awkward” given Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision last year to open Germany’s borders to all Muslims who sought asylum.

Here is PC policing writ large and literal. So surely it’s time to join the dots. Start with the church leaders who shrouded the 2015 protests in darkness. Draw the line to police reports that lied about the assaults and rapes committed by groups of migrants. Extend the line to Germany’s ­national broadcaster, ZDF, which chose not to ­report the news from Cologne on the major news program the following night. Then draw the line further to German government ministers who also refused to speak of the background of perpetrators for more than a week. Continue the line to Cologne’s mayor, who rejected any link between the assaults and migrants, even after the Cologne police chief admitted the connection, describing the ­attacks as “of a totally new dimension”. Extend that line a little further to the same mayor who, in the days after the attacks, advised women to keep “a certain distance of more than an arm’s length” from strangers, clearly ignoring that the men were responsible for the assaults, not the female victims.

This series of connected dots emerges from just one small city in Europe. Join the dots in other Western countries. PC police who censor the works of great authors, from Mark Twain to Enid Blyton, as part of a global battalion of self-appointed paternalists who tell us what to think, what to say, what not to say, what to feel. A dictatorial gay lobby that mocks any opposition to gay marriage as homo­phobic. Refugee activists who deride those who have learnt from experience that support for migration is boosted when migra­tion is controlled by our government, rather than contracted out to people-smugglers. Climate change zealots who ridicule those who ask questions about climate models that have proved inaccu­rate, claims of climate destruction that haven’t transpired and emails that pointed to collusion and misrepresentation among climate ­academics. Feminist ideologues who would rather hound opponents off university campuses or retreat to a “safe room” than listen to facts. Students who would ­rather demolish the statue of Cecil Rhodes than debate the pros and cons of a historical figure.

The pockmarks of political correctness are too numerous to count. But their cumulative effect is clear. More than three decades of political correctness is suffocating liberty in the West. The next outcome is equally obvious: if you join the dots between each episode of political correctness, you end up with the unmistakeable image of Donald Trump — or the faces of other right-wing populists whose electoral appeal is on the rise from Austria to Denmark, Finland to Hungary and more.

Those who write off Trump, and other right-wing populists, as nut-jobs and their supporters as hothead members of the forgotten middle class are only half right. The stifling imposition of political correctness by the political, media and cultural elite has created the Trump spectacle.

After years of trying to reason, even debate, with a PC crowd that brooks no disagreement, Trump sticks it up them. People may not agree with every stupid or insulting thing Trump says, but maybe they are liberated by a politician who says what he wants. After years of being told what to think, what to say, what not to say, it’s ­refreshing to listen to a bloke who won’t have a bar of the myriad political correctness filters applied to every field of life.

The shame is that the vacuum created by political correctness is being filled by a man who is not fit to be president. But maybe the rise of Trump is a necessary first step, a clumsy one to be sure, but one that precedes the rise one day of more sensible leaders who understand the cult of political correctness is not a centrist phenomenon. While the cult draws believers from the elites, most ordinary people want more, not less, freedom to think and speak. It’s not called common sense for nothing.

A first step towards ending racial discrimination is to stop discriminating racially

Oscar-nominated British star Charlotte Rampling Friday launched a furious attack on black actors who want special treatment in Hollywood – accusing them of ‘anti-white racism’.

The 69-year-old was responding to calls to boycott the ceremony led by Spike Lee, Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith.

They are unhappy that, for the second consecutive year, all contenders in the best actor categories are white.

But Ms Rampling, who has received her first Oscar nomination for her role in ‘45 Years’, said this kind of politically correct thinking was a form of racism in itself.

Speaking on Europe 1 radio station in Paris, where she now lives, Ms Rampling said: ‘It’s anti-white racism. Maybe black actors don’t deserve to be on the final stretch?’

Ms Rampling, who first made her name in classic films including Georgy Girl in the 1960s, said she was also opposed to quotas being introduced to promote black actors.

‘Why classify people?’ she said. ‘They feel like a minority, they think: “We’re the black actors and there are not enough of us.’You can't say 'I'm going to vote for him, he's not very good, but he's black, I'll vote for him

Her views seemed to be supported by Sir Michael Caine, who spoke out against race coming into the nomination process.

He told the BBC: 'There's loads of black actors. In the end you can't vote for an actor because he's black. You can't say 'I'm going to vote for him, he's not very good, but he's black, I'll vote for him'. You have to give a good performance and I'm sure people have. I saw Idris Elba (in Beasts Of No Nation)... I thought he was wonderful.'

The two-time Academy Award-winner also said black actors should 'be patient'.

'Of course it will come. It took me years to get an Oscar, years,' he added. 'The best thing about it is you don't have to go. Especially the Oscars, 24 hours on an aeroplane and I've got to sit there clapping Leonardo DiCaprio.

'I love Leonardo, he played my son in a movie, but I'm too old to travel that far and sit in an audience and clap someone else.'

The diversity issue has been dividing Hollywood all week and looks set to dominate discussions surrounding the Chris Rock hosted ceremony scheduled for February 28.

Black stars fail to feature on any of the four lead and supporting acting categories. It follows a 2015 shortlist which was equally homogeneous.

The only black projects nominated for an Oscar - What Happened, Miss Simone? for documentary and Straight Outta Compton for screenplay - have all white nominees.

Jada Pinkett Smith publicly addressed the issue with a video on her Facebook page which helped kick-start the debate about this year's lack of diversity.

The Magic Mike XXL star said she would not attend the ceremony over the issue. 'I can't help ask the question: is it time that people of color, recognize how much power and influence we have amassed that we no longer need to ask to be invited anywhere,' she said. 'I ask the question have we now come to a new time and place, where we recognize that we can no longer beg for the love, acknowledgement or respect of any group.

'That maybe it is time that we love, respect and acknowledge ourselves in the way we are asking others to do, then that that is the place of true power. I'm simply asking the question.

'Here is what I believe, the Academy has the right to acknowledge whomever they choose, to invite whomever they choose and now, I think that it is our responsibility now, to make the change.'

Her husband Will backed her in an appearance on Good Morning America on Thursday.

‘I think that diversity is the American superpower. That's why we're great,’ he told Robin Roberts in the exclusive interview.

'So many different people from so many different places adding their ideas, their inspirations, their influences to this beautiful American gumbo. … so when I look at the series of nominations of the Academy, it is not reflecting that beauty.’There is no conspiracy. It is mostly a bunch of white guys. And I am guilty of it too. We gravitate to our own

Since the Hollywood power couple came to the fore, numerous other stars have spoken out.

However, Michael Moore and Spike Lee are the only two to go as far as backing the boycott.

For years, the New York Police Department viewed Islamic terrorism through a study titled “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat.” It featured analysis from the RAND Corporation, studies of recent terrorist attacks in other countries, and studied how Muslim men radicalized to the point of attacking the West.

Recently, the American Civil Liberties Union managed to force the NYPD to stop using the report to understand the metastasizing threat of Islamic terror. It was biased against Muslims, the ACLU insisted, and that obviously trumps security to the politically correct Left — once again illustrating the Left’s blithe disregard for how Islamic terror develops. Instead, they want national security to be an equal opportunity investigation, lumping right-wing extremists and Islamic terrorists in the same suspect file.

In related news, the House voted, with enough votes to override a veto, to send a bill to the Senate that would reform how Syrian and Iraqi refugees are screened before entering this country, ordering FBI background checks on them. Barack Obama and the Senate Democrats will fight, saying that the legislation isn’t compassionate, but the bill’s success in the House shows there is real concern over this administration’s refusal to diagnose the reason some Middle Eastern immigrants turn to violence.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.

Background

The most beautiful woman in the world? I think she was. Yes: It's Agnetha Fältskog

A beautiful baby is king -- with blue eyes, blond hair and white skin. How incorrect can you get?

Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair

Enough said

A face of Leftist hate: Cory Booker, (D-NJ)

There really is an actress named Donna Air. She seems a pleasant enough woman, though

What feminism has wrought:

There's actually some wisdom there. The dreamy lady says she is holding out for someone who meets her standards. The other lady reasonably replies "There's nobody there". Standards can be unrealistically high and feminists have laboured mightily to make them so

Some bright spark occasionally decides that Leftism is feminine and conservatism is masculine. That totally misses the point. If true, how come the vote in American presidential elections usually shows something close to a 50/50 split between men and women? And in the 2016 Presidential election, Trump won 53 percent of white women, despite allegations focused on his past treatment of some women.

Political correctness is Fascism pretending to be manners

Political Correctness is as big a threat to free speech as Communism and Fascism. All 3 were/are socialist.

The problem with minorities is not race but culture. For instance, many American black males fit in well with the majority culture. They go to college, work legally for their living, marry and support the mother of their children, go to church, abstain from crime and are considerate towards others. Who could reasonably object to such people? It is people who subscribe to minority cultures -- black, Latino or Muslim -- who can give rise to concern. If antisocial attitudes and/or behaviour become pervasive among a group, however, policies may reasonably devised to deal with that group as a whole

Black lives DON'T matter -- to other blacks. The leading cause of death among young black males is attack by other young black males

Leftist logic: There are allegedly no distinctions between groups of humans, yet we're still supposed to celebrate diversity.

Identity politics is a form of racism

'White Privilege'. .. Oh yes. .. That was abundant in the Irish potato famines. ... And in the Scottish Highland Clearances. ...And in transportations to Australia. ... And in Workhouses. ... 'White privilege' was absolutely RIFE!

Psychological defence mechanisms such as projection play a large part in Leftist thinking and discourse. So their frantic search for evil in the words and deeds of others is easily understandable. The evil is in themselves. Leftist motivations are fundamentally Fascist. They want to "fundamentally transform" the lives of their fellow citizens, which is as authoritarian as you can get. We saw where it led in Russia and China. The "compassion" that Leftists parade is just a cloak for their ghastly real motivations

Occasionally I put up on this blog complaints about the privileged position of homosexuals in today's world. I look forward to the day when the pendulum swings back and homosexuals are treated as equals before the law. To a simple Leftist mind, that makes me "homophobic", even though I have no fear of any kind of homosexuals.

But I thought it might be useful for me to point out a few things. For a start, I am not unwise enough to say that some of my best friends are homosexual. None are, in fact. Though there are two homosexuals in my normal social circle whom I get on well with and whom I think well of.

Of possible relevance: My late sister was a homosexual; I loved Liberace's sense of humour and I thought that Robert Helpmann was marvellous as Don Quixote in the Nureyev ballet of that name.

One may say that the person who gets in trouble with drugs is just as dumb without them

I record on this blog many examples of negligent, inefficient and reprehensible behaviour on the part of British police. After 13 years of Labour party rule they have become highly politicized, with values that reflect the demands made on them by the political Left rather than than what the community expects of them. They have become lazy and cowardly and avoid dealing with real crime wherever possible -- preferring instead to harass normal decent people for minor infractions -- particularly offences against political correctness. They are an excellent example of the destruction that can be brought about by Leftist meddling.

I also record on this blog much social worker evil -- particularly British social worker evil. The evil is neither negligent nor random. It follows exactly the pattern you would expect from the Marxist-oriented indoctrination they get in social work school -- where the middle class is seen as the enemy and the underclass is seen as virtuous. So social workers are lightning fast to take children away from normal decent parents on the basis of of minor or imaginary infractions while turning a blind eye to gross child abuse by the underclass

The genetics of crime: I have been pointing out for some time the evidence that there is a substantial genetic element in criminality. Some people are born bad. See here, here, here, here (DOI: 10.1111/jcpp.12581) and here, for instance"

Gender is a property of words, not of people. Using it otherwise is just another politically correct distortion -- though not as pernicious as calling racial discrimination "Affirmative action"

Postmodernism is fundamentally frivolous. Postmodernists routinely condemn racism and intolerance as wrong but then say that there is no such thing as right and wrong. They are clearly not being serious. Either they do not really believe in moral nihilism or they believe that racism cannot be condemned!

Postmodernism is in fact just a tantrum. Post-Soviet reality in particular suits Leftists so badly that their response is to deny that reality exists. That they can be so dishonest, however, simply shows how psychopathic they are.

So why do Leftists say "There is no such thing as right and wrong" when backed into a rhetorical corner? They say it because that is the predominant conclusion of analytic philosophers. And, as Keynes said: "Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back”

Juergen Habermas, a veteran leftist German philosopher stunned his admirers not long ago by proclaiming, "Christianity, and nothing else, is the ultimate foundation of liberty, conscience, human rights, and democracy, the benchmarks of Western civilization. To this day, we have no other options [than Christianity]. We continue to nourish ourselves from this source. Everything else is postmodern chatter."

Consider two "jokes" below:

Q. "Why are Leftists always standing up for blacks and homosexuals?

A. Because for all three groups their only God is their penis"

Pretty offensive, right? So consider this one:

Q. "Why are evangelical Christians like the Taliban?

A. They are both religious fundamentalists"

The latter "joke" is not a joke at all, of course. It is a comparison routinely touted by Leftists. Both "jokes" are greatly offensive and unfair to the parties targeted but one gets a pass without question while the other would bring great wrath on the head of anyone uttering it. Why? Because political correctness is in fact just Leftist bigotry. Bigotry is unfairly favouring one or more groups of people over others -- usually justified as "truth".

One of my more amusing memories is from the time when the Soviet Union still existed and I was teaching sociology in a major Australian university. On one memorable occasion, we had a representative of the Soviet Womens' organization visit us -- a stout and heavily made-up lady of mature years. When she was ushered into our conference room, she was greeted with something like adulation by the local Marxists. In question time after her talk, however, someone asked her how homosexuals were treated in the USSR. She replied: "We don't have any. That was before the revolution". The consternation and confusion that produced among my Leftist colleagues was hilarious to behold and still lives vividly in my memory. The more things change, the more they remain the same, however. In Sept. 2007 President Ahmadinejad told Columbia university that there are no homosexuals in Iran.

It is widely agreed (with mainly Lesbians dissenting) that boys need their fathers. What needs much wider recognition is that girls need their fathers too. The relationship between a "Daddy's girl" and her father is perhaps the most beautiful human relationship there is. It can help give the girl concerned inner strength for the rest of her life.

A modern feminist complains: "We are so far from “having it all” that “we barely even have a slice of the pie, which we probably baked ourselves while sobbing into the pastry at 4am”."

Patriotism does NOT in general go with hostilty towards others. See e.g. here and here and even here ("Ethnocentrism and Xenophobia: A Cross-Cultural Study" by anthropologist Elizabeth Cashdan. In Current Anthropology Vol. 42, No. 5, December 2001).

The love of bureaucracy is very Leftist and hence "correct". Who said this? "Account must be taken of every single article, every pound of grain, because what socialism implies above all is keeping account of everything". It was V.I. Lenin

"An objection I hear frequently is: ‘Why should we tolerate intolerance?’ The assumption is that tolerating views that you don’t agree with is like a gift, an act of kindness. It suggests we’re doing people a favour by tolerating their view. My argument is that tolerance is vital to us, to you and I, because it’s actually the presupposition of all our freedoms. You cannot be free in any meaningful sense unless there is a recognition that we are free to act on our beliefs, we’re free to think what we want and express ourselves freely. Unless we have that freedom, all those other freedoms that we have on paper mean nothing" -- SOURCE

RELIGION:

Although it is a popular traditional chant, the "Kol Nidre" should be abandoned by modern Jewish congregations. It was totally understandable where it originated in the Middle Ages but is morally obnoxious in the modern world and vivid "proof" of all sorts of antisemitic stereotypes

What the Bible says about homosexuality:

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; It is abomination" -- Lev. 18:22

In his great diatribe against the pagan Romans, the apostle Paul included homosexuality among their sins:

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.... Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them" -- Romans 1:26,27,32.

So churches that condone homosexuality are clearly post-Christian

Although I am an atheist, I have great respect for the wisdom of ancient times as collected in the Bible. And its condemnation of homosexuality makes considerable sense to me. In an era when family values are under constant assault, such a return to the basics could be helpful. Nonetheless, I approve of St. Paul's advice in the second chapter of his epistle to the Romans that it is for God to punish them, not us. In secular terms, homosexuality between consenting adults in private should not be penalized but nor should it be promoted or praised. In Christian terms, "Gay pride" is of the Devil

The homosexuals of Gibeah (Judges 19 & 20) set in train a series of events which brought down great wrath and destruction on their tribe. The tribe of Benjamin was almost wiped out when it would not disown its homosexuals. Are we seeing a related process in the woes presently being experienced by the amoral Western world? Note that there was one Western country that was not affected by the global financial crisis and subsequently had no debt problems: Australia. In September 2012 the Australian federal parliament considered a bill to implement homosexual marriage. It was rejected by a large majority -- including members from both major political parties

Religion is deeply human. The recent discoveries at Gobekli Tepe suggest that it was religion not farming that gave birth to civilization. Early civilizations were at any rate all very religious. Atheism is mainly a very modern development and is even now very much a minority opinion

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" - Isaiah 5:20 (KJV)

I think it's not unreasonable to see Islam as the religion of the Devil. Any religion that loves death or leads to parents rejoicing when their children blow themselves up is surely of the Devil -- however you conceive of the Devil. Whether he is a man in a red suit with horns and a tail, a fallen spirit being, or simply the evil side of human nature hardly matters. In all cases Islam is clearly anti-life and only the Devil or his disciples could rejoice in that.

And there surely could be few lower forms of human behaviour than to give abuse and harm in return for help. The compassionate practices of countries with Christian traditions have led many such countries to give a new home to Muslim refugees and seekers after a better life. It's basic humanity that such kindness should attract gratitude and appreciation. But do Muslims appreciate it? They most commonly show contempt for the countries and societies concerned. That's another sign of Satanic influence.

And how's this for demonic thinking?: "Asian father whose daughter drowned in Dubai sea 'stopped lifeguards from saving her because he didn't want her touched and dishonoured by strange men'

Islamic terrorism isn’t a perversion of Islam. It’s the implementation of Islam. It is not a religion of the persecuted, but the persecutors. Its theology is violent supremacism.

And where Muslims tell us that they love death, the great Christian celebration is of the birth of a baby -- the monogenes theos (only begotten god) as John 1:18 describes it in the original Greek -- Christmas!

No wonder so many Muslims are hostile and angry. They have little companionship from women and not even any companionship from dogs -- which are emotionally important in most other cultures. Dogs are "unclean"

On all my blogs, I express my view of what is important primarily by the readings that I select for posting. I do however on occasions add personal comments in italicized form at the beginning of an article.

I am rather pleased to report that I am a lifelong conservative. Out of intellectual curiosity, I did in my youth join organizations from right across the political spectrum so I am certainly not closed-minded and am very familiar with the full spectrum of political thinking. Nonetheless, I did not have to undergo the lurch from Left to Right that so many people undergo. At age 13 I used my pocket-money to subscribe to the "Reader's Digest" -- the main conservative organ available in small town Australia of the 1950s. I have learnt much since but am pleased and amused to note that history has since confirmed most of what I thought at that early age.

I imagine that the the RD is still sending mailouts to my 1950s address!

Germaine Greer is a stupid old Harpy who is notable only for the depth and extent of her hatreds

There are also two blogspot blogs which record what I think are my main recent articles here and here. Similar content can be more conveniently accessed via my subject-indexed list of short articles here or here (I rarely write long articles these days)

Note: If the link to one of my articles is not working, the article concerned can generally be viewed by prefixing to the filename the following: http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/42197/20121106-1520/jonjayray.comuv.com/

NOTE: The archives provided by blogspot below are rather inconvenient. They break each month up into small bits. If you want to scan whole months at a time, the backup archives will suit better. See here or here